Archive-Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 00:07:57 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 00:07:02 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009A1A7A.968EA3D0.330@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU> Subject: MX-LIST Administrivia: Monthly Post Posting statistics for list MX-LIST during April 1996 Total number of posts: 107 Total number of posters: 60 Total number of subscribers: 290 Last modified: 28-SEP-1995 13:33 (Updated digest info) Welcome to MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU, an electronic mailing list established for the discussion of the Message Exchange mail software. This is a routine posting you will see from time to time on MX-List. MX-List postings are also available in a daily digest format. To subscribe to the digest, send the following command in the body of a mail message to MXserver@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU: SUBSCRIBE MX-List-Digest "Your real name here" The MX-List archives are maintained at ARCHIVES@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU. To get a copy of any month's postings, send an e-mail message with the body SEND MX-List.yyyy-mm to ARCHIVES@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU, where "yyyy" is the year and "mm" is the numeric representation of the month. For example, the message SENDME MX-List.1992-04 will send the archives for April 1992. MX itself is available via anonymous ftp from ftp.spc.edu in [.MX.MX041]. You can also get it via e-mail by sending the commands SEND MX and SEND FILESERV_TOOLS on separate lines in the body of a mail message to FILESERV@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU. To remove yourself from the mailing list, send the following command to MXserver@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU: SIGNOFF MX-List MXserver supports a few other commands for your convenience. The following commands can be handled automatically by the list processor: SIGNOFF MX-List - to remove yourself from the list REVIEW MX-List - to get a list of subscribers QUERY MX-List - to get the status of your entry on the list SET MX-List DIGEST - to switch to digest mode SET MX-List NODIGEST - to switch to non-digest mode SET MX-List NOMAIL - to remain on the list but not receive mail SET MX-List MAIL - to resume receiving mail from the list SET MX-List CONCEAL - to not report your address in a REVIEW SET MX-List NOCONCEAL - to report your address in a REVIEW SET MX-List REPRO - to receive posts you make to MX-List SET MX-List NOREPRO - to not receive posts you make to MX-List LIST - to get a list of mailing lists served by WKUVX1 HELP - to receive a help file By default, subscriptions are set to MAIL, REPRO, NOCONCEAL. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions about MX-List, please contact the list owner at the address below. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer goathunter@LOKI.COM The LOKI Group, Inc. P.O. Box 9609 Bowling Green, KY 42102-9609 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 07:05:11 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: lva@wirehub.net (Laurens van Alphen) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: MX info needed Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 11:45:35 GMT Message-ID: <31874ec1.10135873@news.wirehub.nl> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU please tell me where i can find info on how to resolve "virtual domains" - thus not representing a smtp host, only MX RR's how do i ask a DNS server where i should post?? note: i run win95/nt NOT unix thanks | Laurens v. Alphen - lva@wirehub.net - http://www.wirehub.nl/~lva | ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 07:55:28 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 08:57:06 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: David Priebe Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@madgoat.com CC: priebe@renfrew.edu.on.ca Message-ID: <009A1AC4.A34A2AA0.20@board1.renfrew.edu.on.ca> Subject: RE: READ THIS!!! IMPORTANT INFO! > Well, this last magazine offer pushed me over the edge. I've now set > the MX-List mailing list so that only subscribers can post to it. > > !!!!!IMPORTANT!!!!!! I'm usually not the one to post unnecessary messages to any list, BUT TTTTT H H A N N K K Y Y O U U !! T H H A A NN N K K Y Y O O U U !! T HHHH A A A N N N KK Y O O U U !! T H H A A N NN K K Y O O U U T H H A A N N K K Y O UUU .. (this one was necessary!!) > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. > David Priebe, System's Analyst, Renfrew County Board of Ed - priebe@renfrew.edu.on.ca President, ValleyNET (Renfrew County) Inc. "Renfrew County's Freenet!!" ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 09:19:41 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 10:18:15 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A1ACF.F8EA5420.5@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: MX info needed lva@wirehub.net (Laurens van Alphen) wrote: >please tell me where i can find info on how to resolve "virtual domains" - thus >not representing a smtp host, only MX RR's > >how do i ask a DNS server where i should post?? > >note: i run win95/nt NOT unix > >thanks I am not sure that I understand this question, but if you are asking how to query a Domain Name Server to get information about MX Resource Records, then you need to use nslookup. NT supplies several TCP/IP utilities, but nslookup is not among them, so you may need to get access to a Unix or VMS system. Once you start nslookup, the command ls -m domain-name will display the MX records for the specified domain. On VMS systems with UCX you can use UCX$NSLOOKUP to do this. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 12:39:37 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 13:39:08 EDT From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: lva@wirehub.net, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009A1AEC.09B4F820.9@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: MX info needed > please tell me where i can find info on how to resolve "virtual domains" > - thus not representing a smtp host, only MX RR's > > how do i ask a DNS server where i should post?? > > note: i run win95/nt NOT unix This mailing list (and newsgroup) concerns the mailer program named MX, not the MX-type domain name server (DNS) records. How do you resolve MX (DNS) records? _You_ don't. The name resolver on your computer should do it automatically. Likewise, any normal name server should return MX records as it is normally used. They only affect the delivery of EMail, not "post"ings such as to newsgroups. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 06 May 1996 21:35:06 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Mon, 06 May 1996 21:31:43 CST From: J Kmoch Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM CC: kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu Message-ID: <009A1F1B.E2220760.46@whscdp.whs.edu> Subject: invalid final deliver userid: user@localhost ??? In the last few days, I as postmaster have been getting the following message. >Invalid final delivery userid: USER@LOCALHOST > >Original message follows. > >Received: from [192.135.135.1] by mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us > (SMTPD32-960308) id A1BDBE40124; Mon May 06 17:48:29 1996 >X-ListName: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >Warnings-To: <> >Errors-To: owner-mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >Sender: owner-mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >Received: from mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us by WHSCDP.WHS.EDU (MX V4.1 VAX) with > SMTP; Mon, 06 May 1996 17:37:55 CST >Received: from [169.227.130.9] by mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us (SMTPD32-960308) id > AE823501D6; Mon May 06 17:34:42 1996 >X-Sender: WALLNEBJ@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us >Message-ID: >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 17:39:10 -0600 >To: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >From: jennesdr@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us >Reply-To: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu, jennesdr@MAIL.MILWAUKEE.K12.WI.US > > > Anyone have any idea how this is happening and how to correct it? Joe -- Joe Kmoch Washington High School kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu 2525 N. Sherman Blvd (414) 449-2765 (office) Milwaukee, WI 53210 (414) 444-9250 (fax) (414) 444-9760 (gen school phone) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 05:53:14 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 12:52:59 +0200 From: Richard Levitte - GNU on VMS hacker Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu Message-ID: <009A1F9C.95349C99.27@e.kth.se> Subject: Re: invalid final deliver userid: user@localhost ??? >From: J Kmoch >In the last few days, I as postmaster have been getting the following message. > >>Invalid final delivery userid: USER@LOCALHOST Have you reviewed the members of the list to which it happens (mps-inservice)? -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! Richard Levitte, GNU on VMS hacker ! tel: +46-8-26 52 47 ! ! Spannvägen 38, I ! fax: none for the moment ! ! S-161 43 Bromma ! Internet: levitte@e.kth.se ! ! SWEDEN ! ! +-GNUish VMS-+ You may not add me to a commercial mailing list or send me commercial advertising without my consent! See http://www.e.kth.se/~levitte/anti.html for further reference. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 07:19:00 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 07:17:02 CST From: J Kmoch Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A1F6D.A7211320.13@whscdp.whs.edu> Subject: Re: invalid final deliver userid: user@localhost ??? On 7-MAY-1996 at 07:08:19.58 levitte@e.kth.se (Richard Levitte - GNU on VMS hacker) wrote: >>From: J Kmoch > >>In the last few days, I as postmaster have been getting the following message. >> >>>Invalid final delivery userid: USER@LOCALHOST > >Have you reviewed the members of the list to which it happens >(mps-inservice)? > Yes - I just did again and found nothing when searching for this, the word local or anything else I tried. Still getting these messages... Thanks for your concern. Joe -- Joe Kmoch Washington High School kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu 2525 N. Sherman Blvd (414) 449-2765 (office) Milwaukee, WI 53210 (414) 444-9250 (fax) (414) 444-9760 (gen school phone) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 07:24:54 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 07:23:25 CST From: J Kmoch Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM CC: kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu Message-ID: <009A1F6E.8B027A20.17@whscdp.whs.edu> Subject: tuning mx V4.1? We've established a mailing list (the infamous mps-inservice) for practice by participants in our Internet inservice program. This week, for example, there are about 150 people per day receiving online inservicing at about 10 sites. Since all of the courses are doing essentially the same things at the same time, there are many "hits" on the listserv almost simultaneously. The listserv right now has about 275 members, and will be growing dramatically in the next few days. One of the exercises is to post a sample message. Needless to say, this generates LOTS of traffic. Is there anything I can do to speed up the processing? Like creating a second router or ??? I don't have the docs handy, so I don't know if this is directly addressed in there. Perhaps someone may have a suggestion or two that I could implement later today to deal with this explosion of messages (for example, yesterday, I believe MX handled something like 30,000 messages generated after 4pm. Most of these are due to posting a message to the list, but there wre maybe 300 or so messages which requested a subscription and a list of current members. Any help or suggestions? Joe -- Joe Kmoch Washington High School kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu 2525 N. Sherman Blvd (414) 449-2765 (office) Milwaukee, WI 53210 (414) 444-9250 (fax) (414) 444-9760 (gen school phone) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 08:09:46 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 08:09:35 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: KMOCH@WHSCDP.WHS.EDU Message-ID: <009A1F74.FE00D462.2@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: invalid final deliver userid: user@localhost ??? J Kmoch writes: > >>>In the last few days, I as postmaster have been getting the following message. >>> >>>>Invalid final delivery userid: USER@LOCALHOST >> >>Have you reviewed the members of the list to which it happens >>(mps-inservice)? >> >Yes - I just did again and found nothing when searching for this, the word >local or anything else I tried. > That's not what you should look for. Instead, look at the headers from the text of the original message, which was returned to you: >Received: from [192.135.135.1] by mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us > (SMTPD32-960308) id A1BDBE40124; Mon May 06 17:48:29 1996 [...] >X-Sender: WALLNEBJ@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us My guess is that the address above is causing the problem. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 08:10:53 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 08:10:27 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: KMOCH@WHSCDP.WHS.EDU Message-ID: <009A1F75.1D460A13.5@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: tuning mx V4.1? J Kmoch writes: > >One of the exercises is to post a sample message. Needless to say, this >generates LOTS of traffic. Is there anything I can do to speed up the >processing? Like creating a second router or ??? Yes, creating a second router and multiple LOCAL and SMTP agents would help a lot. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 08:18:43 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 08:21:43 CDT From: Bob Christenson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A1F76.B054F200.4@fcseng.frco.com> Subject: Re: invalid final deliver userid: user@localhost ??? J Kmoch writes: } } On 7-MAY-1996 at 07:08:19.58 levitte@e.kth.se } (Richard Levitte - GNU on VMS hacker) wrote: } >>From: J Kmoch } > } >>In the last few days, I as postmaster have been getting the following message. } >> } >>>Invalid final delivery userid: USER@LOCALHOST } > } >Have you reviewed the members of the list to which it happens } >(mps-inservice)? } > } Yes - I just did again and found nothing when searching for this, the word } local or anything else I tried. } } Still getting these messages... } } Thanks for your concern. } } Joe } You might also check to see that any of the members of the list that are local to the machine havn't set some VMS mail forwarding strangely. ie. - USER@LOCALHOST $ MAIL MAIL> SHOW FORWARD/USER=* EXIT $ Bob ----------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- | Robert A. Christenson | VOICE: 515.754.3854 | EMAIL: | | Fisher-Rosemount | FAX: 515.754.2831 | rachri1@fcseng.frco.com | | 205 S. Center St. | ______ _______ _______ | | R.A. Engel Technical Center | | _ \ | _ | | ____| | | Marshalltown, IA 50158 | | |_) / __| _ |__| |____ __ | ----------------------------- |___|\___\__|__| |__|__|_______|__| ---------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 15:11:42 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 16:11:12 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009A1FB8.45FD1B20.22@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: Local Delivery Problem Here is a puzzle which I hope that some one can help me solve. We have a VAX 4000 and an Alphaserver 2100 each running MX 4.2. If I send a message to the VAX (FRED) addressed as user@fred, it is delivered promptly. If I a send a message to the Alpha (TOPCAT) similarly addressed as user@topcat, it gets bounced with an error message complaining that the message was "received too many times by this host". The VAX is running VMS 5.5-2 and UCX 3.1 ECO Level 8. The Alpha is running VMS-AXP 6.2 and UCX 4.0. Here is a copy of the last of the 10 debug log files which were created for the bounced message. (On FRED, where the message was delivered, only one log file was created.) Except for the host names and addresses, and the fact that accounting is enabled on TOPCAT but not FRED, the two MX configurations are the same. STM[4]: Send "220 topcat.bridgew.edu MX V4.2 AXP SMTP server ready at Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:28 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "HELO topcat.bridgew.edu" STM[4]: Send "250 Hello, topcat.bridgew.edu" STM[4]: Receive "MAIL FROM:" STM[4]: Send "250 MAIL command accepted." STM[4]: Receive "RCPT TO:" STM[4]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" STM[4]: Receive "DATA" STM[4]: Send "354 Start mail input; end with ." STM[4]: Receive "Received: from topcat.bridgew.edu by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with" STM[4]: Receive " SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:26 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Received: from topcat.bridgew.edu by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with" STM[4]: Receive " SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:24 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Received: from topcat.bridgew.edu by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with" STM[4]: Receive " SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:22 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Received: from topcat.bridgew.edu by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with" STM[4]: Receive " SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:20 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Received: from topcat.bridgew.edu by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with" STM[4]: Receive " SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:18 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Received: from topcat.bridgew.edu by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with" STM[4]: Receive " SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:15 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Received: from topcat.bridgew.edu by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with" STM[4]: Receive " SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 10:44:14 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Received: from infoserv2 by topcat.bridgew.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; Tue, 07" STM[4]: Receive " May 1996 10:44:12 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0" STM[4]: Receive "Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960507143817.002b0938@fred.bridgew.edu>" STM[4]: Receive "X-Sender: smcneilly@fred.bridgew.edu" STM[4]: Receive "X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)" STM[4]: Receive "MIME-Version: 1.0" STM[4]: Receive "Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"" STM[4]: Receive "Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 10:38:17 -0400" STM[4]: Receive "To: mcneilly@topcat" STM[4]: Receive "From: Scott McNeilly " STM[4]: Receive "Subject: Eudora" STM[4]: Receive "" STM[4]: Receive "THis is a drill! THis is a drill!" STM[4]: Receive "Scott McNeilly smcneilly@bridgew.edu" STM[4]: Receive "Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 " STM[4]: Receive "Information Services FAX: 508-697-1774" STM[4]: Receive "Bridgewater State College Was mich nicht umbringt," STM[4]: Receive "Bridgewater, MA 02325 macht mich staerker." STM[4]: Receive "" STM[4]: Receive "." STM[4]: Send "554 Received too many times by this host." STM[4]: Receive "QUIT" STM[4]: Send "221 topcat.bridgew.edu Service closing transmission channel" STM[4]: Receive "QUIT" -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 15:15:06 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 15:14:46 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: SMCNEILLY@FRED.BRIDGEW.EDU Message-ID: <009A1FB0.63F46AAF.5@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Local Delivery Problem Scott McNeilly writes: > >Here is a puzzle which I hope that some one can help me solve. We >have a VAX 4000 and an Alphaserver 2100 each running MX 4.2. If >I send a message to the VAX (FRED) addressed as user@fred, it is delivered >promptly. If I a send a message to the Alpha (TOPCAT) similarly addressed >as user@topcat, it gets bounced with an error message complaining that >the message was "received too many times by this host". The VAX is running >VMS 5.5-2 and UCX 3.1 ECO Level 8. The Alpha is running VMS-AXP 6.2 and >UCX 4.0. > >Here is a copy of the last of the 10 debug log files which were created for >the bounced message. (On FRED, where the message was delivered, only one >log file was created.) Except for the host names and addresses, and the fact >that accounting is enabled on TOPCAT but not FRED, the two MX configurations are >the same. > Sounds like you don't have TOPCAT defined as a LOCAL PATH inside of MCP on node TOPCAT. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 17:42:03 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 17:35:50 CST From: J Kmoch Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <009A1FC4.198775C0.2@whscdp.whs.edu> Subject: problems On 7-MAY-1996 at 17:02:06.79 Postmaster@whscdp.whs.edu (Local delivery agent) wrote: ... > >--> Error description: >Error-For: vodenrx@whscdp.whs.edu >Error-Code: 3 >Error-Text: No such local user I keep getting this message even though this address is not on the mps-inservice listserv! It is being generated by various addresses in the X-Sender field. > >------------------------------ Rejected message ------------------------------ >X-ListName: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >Warnings-To: <> >Errors-To: owner-mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >Sender: owner-mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >Received: from mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us by WHSCDP.WHS.EDU (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 07 May 1996 17:00:10 CST >Received: from [169.227.170.30] by mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us (SMTPD32-960308) id A77D38A01C4; Tue May 07 16:58:21 1996 >X-Sender: SHELDOSX@MAIL.MILWAUKEE.K12.WI.US >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >To: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu >From: SHARAYAH SHELDON >Reply-To: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu, SHELDOSX@MAIL.MILWAUKEE.K12.WI.US >Subject: > >Hi! My name is Shayrayah Sheldon and I'm a counselor. I just won a candybar >for sucessfully get on the Listserve. >SHARAYAH SHELDON WALKER MIDDLE SCHOOL >(414) 647-1360 > >sheldosx@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us---------------------------------- > > > -- Joe Kmoch Washington High School kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu 2525 N. Sherman Blvd (414) 449-2765 (office) Milwaukee, WI 53210 (414) 444-9250 (fax) (414) 444-9760 (gen school phone) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 17:46:48 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 17:46:29 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: KMOCH@WHSCDP.WHS.EDU Message-ID: <009A1FC5.9583ADF0.33@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: problems J Kmoch writes: > >>--> Error description: >>Error-For: vodenrx@whscdp.whs.edu >>Error-Code: 3 >>Error-Text: No such local user > >I keep getting this message even though this address is not on the >mps-inservice listserv! It is being generated by various addresses in the >X-Sender field. > Now I would suspect someone has used SET FORWARD in MAIL, possibly, to an account that no longer exists. For more details, enable MX Local debugging and check the log files created in MX_LOCAL_DIR: $ define/system/exec mx_local_debug true Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 08 May 1996 09:38:24 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 08 May 1996 10:37:50 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009A2052.DEA1E500.20@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: Local Delivery Problem From: MX%"Brian.D.Reed@att.com" 7-MAY-1996 21:32:42.25 >>Here is a puzzle which I hope that some one can help me solve. We >>have a VAX 4000 and an Alphaserver 2100 each running MX 4.2. If >>I send a message to the VAX (FRED) addressed as user@fred, it is >>delivered promptly. If I a send a message to the Alpha (TOPCAT) similarly >>addressed as user@topcat, it gets bounced with an error message complaining >>that the message was "received too many times by this host". First of all, many thanks for responding to my plea for help. >I'd make my first guess that topcat isn't defined as a local host. >You need to add a path statement to MX so that topcat is a local >machine. You should add local paths for all names that the >machine can be addressed as (topcat, topcat.bridgew.edu, etc.) That was my guess, too, but here are the paths: $ mcp MCP> show paths Domain-to-path mappings: Domain="topcat.bridgew.edu", Path=Local Domain="topcat", Path=Local Domain="*.BITNET", Path=SMTP, Route="cunyvm.cuny.edu" Domain="*.UUCP", Path=SMTP, Route="uunet.uu.net" Domain="*", Path=SMTP >What happens is mail comes in addressed to topcat, MX doesn't >recognize that as a local machine, so it sends the message on >to the machine topcat (which it finds in the DNS lookup, >probably because it adds the domain name on. But, topcat is >the same machine, so it sends the message to itself, and starts >over, until it sees the loop. But you are nevertheless correct. Here is the router debug log which show that MX doesn't recognize topcat as a local machine. I tried creating a new MX_CONFIG.MXCFG file, entering the DEFINE PATH statements all over again, but that did not help. So the puzzle now is Why does MX not recognize TOPCAT as a local machine when, in response to the SHOW PATH command, it displays the above mappings. 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.00 %PROCESS, Processing entry number 312 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.05 %PROCESS, Status from READ_INFO was 00000001 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.05 %PROCESS, Recipient #0: 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.05 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.07 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on topcat returned topcat -> 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.07 %FINDPATH, domain name TOPCAT matched path pattern * 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.07 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop topcat, path 2 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.11 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 8-MAY-1996 09:18:52.34 %PROCESS, Path SMTP gets 1 rcpts, entry number 313 >Brian D. Reed >Columbus Works >Brian.D.Reed@att.com >614-860-6218 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 08 May 1996 14:50:24 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <01BB3CF2.68863A40@tax-pc.co.forsyth.nc.us> From: John Annen Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU'" Subject: RE: Local Delivery Problem Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 15:24:09 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BB3CF2.68A7CC00" ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB3CF2.68A7CC00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I noticed the same symptoms yesterday morning. The problem had been = going on at least since the afternoon before. The missing path was the = first thing that occurred to me, also, but I found, as you did, that the = path showed to be there. Our system has several local paths, since it is know by some aliases. = The most common alias seemed to work ok, but the official FQDN was not = being recognized as local. I didn't have much time for investigation when I noticed the problem, so = I just shutdown and restarted MX. That fixed the problem, at least = temporarily. I would be interested to know if you come up with a = solution. BTW, we are also running MX 4.2 on an Alphaserver 2100. Our TCP = transport is Multinet, not UCX. John Annen System Software Analyst Forsyth County MIS Dept. annen@zeus.co.forsyth.nc.us ---------- From: Scott McNeilly[SMTP:smcneilly@fred.bridgew.edu] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 1996 6:37 AM To: mx-list@madgoat.com Subject: Local Delivery Problem From: MX%"Brian.D.Reed@att.com" 7-MAY-1996 21:32:42.25 >>Here is a puzzle which I hope that some one can help me solve. We >>have a VAX 4000 and an Alphaserver 2100 each running MX 4.2. If >>I send a message to the VAX (FRED) addressed as user@fred, it is=20 >>delivered promptly. If I a send a message to the Alpha (TOPCAT) = similarly=20 >>addressed as user@topcat, it gets bounced with an error message = complaining >>that the message was "received too many times by this host". ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB3CF2.68A7CC00 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IgsTAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG ACgBAAABAAAADAAAAAMAADADAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAEsAAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd AQ9UAgAAAABNWC1MaXN0QFdLVVZYMS5XS1UuRURVAFNNVFAATVgtTGlzdEBXS1VWWDEuV0tVLkVE VQAAHgACMAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAAMwAQAAABcAAABNWC1MaXN0QFdLVVZYMS5XS1UuRURV AAADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAZAAAAJ01YLUxpc3RAV0tVVlgxLldLVS5FRFUnAAAA AAIBCzABAAAAHAAAAFNNVFA6TVgtTElTVEBXS1VWWDEuV0tVLkVEVQADAAA5AAAAAAsAQDoBAAAA AgH2DwEAAAAEAAAAAAAAAxwxAQiABwAYAAAASVBNLk1pY3Jvc29mdCBNYWlsLk5vdGUAMQgBBIAB ABsAAABSRTogTG9jYWwgRGVsaXZlcnkgUHJvYmxlbQAxCQEFgAMADgAAAMwHBQAIAA8AGAAJAAMA EwEBIIADAA4AAADMBwUACAAPABIADQADABEBAQmAAQAhAAAARTk5RjY3NjJFMUE4Q0YxMUIyNzkw MDIwQUYzMDJDNjcAHgcBA5AGAMgGAAASAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwA2AAAA AABAADkAIBWc7hM9uwEeAHAAAQAAABsAAABSRTogTG9jYWwgRGVsaXZlcnkgUHJvYmxlbQAAAgFx AAEAAAAWAAAAAbs9E+6LYmef6qjhEc+yeQAgrzAsZwAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8M AQAAABwAAABhbm5lbkB6ZXVzLmNvLmZvcnN5dGgubmMudXMAAwAGELoB6ycDAAcQggQAAB4ACBAB AAAAZQAAAElOT1RJQ0VEVEhFU0FNRVNZTVBUT01TWUVTVEVSREFZTU9STklOR1RIRVBST0JMRU1I QURCRUVOR09JTkdPTkFUTEVBU1RTSU5DRVRIRUFGVEVSTk9PTkJFRk9SRVRIRU1JU1MAAAAAAgEJ EAEAAABEBQAAQAUAAGgIAABMWkZ1w3sCv/8ACgEPAhUCqAXrAoMAUALyCQIAY2gKwHNldDI3BgAG wwKDMgPFAgBwckJxEeJzdGVtAoMzdwLkBxMCgH0KgAjPCdk78RYPMjU1AoAKgQ2xC2DgbmcxMDMU UAsKFFEFC/JjAEAgSSBubwh0aWMJgCB0aGX4IHNhB4AbwAbABTADcB0EIHkHkBPQCyBheSAHBGAE oAuAZy4gIFTbG6ETUG8CYBPgIBGAG3CiYgnhIGdvHZEgAiDsIGEFQB5wYRPAG8ALgNsbUBuDYQGA BJFvH6Ee8PcCEBYQHcVtBAEfYgqwG5DMIHcgIBuDZmkRoAVAjxuQH2IbkB/Rb2NjCHBLFhEbgG8d QGUsH8Bs5HNvJbBidQVAGvACEDh1bmQlsRyRCGAgZB5pJtEkgxuSIvNzaG9+dyU0HvAbgiHhCoUK hU+/CHAcERPCHqEEIBGwdgSQ3wdAH/Ak0CvxIvJzJbAgZGZpBUAEACBrGxAH4GK/HTAl8BvxB0AH MBGwcyIG9m8gMQWgbQRgH7EukiuRqxPgJTR3BbBrH5BrJhQdG5JvDdAbQAcxIEZR/EROIzMbER7h H2IWEAWg+mcDAHobYSNRLCMpzRrweSdxbicFQBGAK8AdQHX/EXAbgAdxJoEFwAuAK8ATwNRpZx/Q aR+hdxugA6CfGvweNSzRJXAa8Gp1IDL6aCZAZCjAH7EmwDPhE8DnCsAT0BtwTVgdwx/RI8DueDl+ H9cT0XAFsArAAxDOeR3BGvAxIHVsHtI3wf8c4RzCJUMtswaQJyMvsRuw3HVwIzAtUCMgYS4hCkDj OGIpzUJUVyWwKNAfwD8WECXDM+AmsB2CPHEgNI4uEeAfogOgQWxwK2HTBJArwSAyGTAwHcEqsvhU Q1AbgCvgAIA/ES1jdk1AABswbhHAJbAzUlXGQzyQKdxKb2hGsUWg3wnwCoUTpAYAMjB0I0BFAe9L oAdAE7EKhUYFsBwgIxEnCFECMB0wTUkF8ERlbwUwKcYAcEvBQDRgOtAurQWgLiHBTnIuIIAuOtBn KdwK9C6QMThHsAIAafAtMTQ0DfAM0FPDC1lcMTYKoANgE9BjBUAtX1XnCodUmwwwVWZGA2E6f1bu VWYMggYABaACQAXQYwcHwAMQP3BbU01UULA6c21jSaBbQkADUEkJgC5iBRBkZwfQLvkJgHVdVo9X nQZgAjBYz21Z21cJgEmgcx0RJbBNCR0hMDglsDE5OTagIDY6MzcUsE1dnxlXnVRvX99Z2214Ldsu kBPAQADAXQBvH9BQ0cZtY69ernVialWhZc99WdtMLDNPcC6QK8EdMFDnHkRR71LzMzZUZxpFWAtj WlM8gCUiQgchQ3BEZC5SCeBkQB/QaIMiwR3QNy1NQVlTsGLyQ0eQY0AyOjQyRkA1cSncPj5IKZEt ckLgcPh1enoecDihG0AjIBrw/SiwcCCiH9EuMwIgG7AsQP8DoBugRuAlgULyK8AdwWGwZ3WnNqNC 4FZBRhFHsDB/O5NGr3uxIBA3EUWMP5Jmv3WnGvARsHvyJYEEEGFdEAclUhuSe1IoRlJFRPIpH8Bk ZDvhEbA0gzrQ/wSQXHMlsC1UdacNsG2jG2H/HjEcQT90QbAa8ELhf68bkgNG04EgVE9QQ0FU74GA AJAicAtgcj9wdZiBr3pAHGBwLEBJwS1RXRB0/wQgBuAmsBtSQpQDoASQA2D/BcCABi+xC1MdkXWn J8eABv0jQiIz8TOgK8AlQiVxAHD/HTA3QotRkPEkMAQgKLATwBYiKc0VMQCTcAMAEBAAAAAAAwAR EAEAAABAAAcwIE/YGRM9uwFAAAgwIE/YGRM9uwEeAD0AAQAAAAUAAABSRTogAAAAAPki ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB3CF2.68A7CC00-- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 08 May 1996 16:16:29 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 08 May 1996 17:15:38 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A208A.712A1500.29@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: Local Delivery Problem From: John Annen >I noticed the same symptoms yesterday morning. The problem had been = >going on at least since the afternoon before. The missing path was the = >first thing that occurred to me, also, but I found, as you did, that the = >path showed to be there. >Our system has several local paths, since it is know by some aliases. = >The most common alias seemed to work ok, but the official FQDN was not = >being recognized as local. > >I didn't have much time for investigation when I noticed the problem, so = >I just shutdown and restarted MX. That fixed the problem, at least = >temporarily. I would be interested to know if you come up with a = >solution. > >BTW, we are also running MX 4.2 on an Alphaserver 2100. Our TCP = >transport is Multinet, not UCX. ---------- From: Scott McNeilly[SMTP:smcneilly@fred.bridgew.edu] >>Here is a puzzle which I hope that some one can help me solve. We >>have a VAX 4000 and an Alphaserver 2100 each running MX 4.2. If >>I send a message to the VAX (FRED) addressed as user@fred, it is=20 >>delivered promptly. If I a send a message to the Alpha (TOPCAT) = similarly=20 >>addressed as user@topcat, it gets bounced with an error message = complaining >>that the message was "received too many times by this host". Shutting down and restarting did not solve the problem. I got around the problem by defining a rewrite rule: Rewrite "<{user}@topcat>" => "<""{user}""@topcat.bridgew.edu>" This solves the problem, but I don't understand why I need a rewrite rule. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 11:10:17 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 11:07:22 CST From: Patrick Beeson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: beeson@uamont.edu Message-ID: <009A2120.293D6670.30@uamont.edu> Subject: Making a list moderated I am trying to figure out how to make a currently un-moderated list moderated. I have the following protection codes on it: g:wred,w:e I would like to make the list moderated, where people can sign on and off without having the list owner do it for them, but I want all the posts to go to the listowner first. Thanks for any help you can give, Patrick Beeson +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Patrick I. Beeson | Phone 501-460-1236| beeson@uamont.edu | |Assistant Director of CS | Fax 501-460-1922| ---------- | |Univ of Ark at Monticello | ----------- | ---------- | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Through the ethernet, off the demper, off the delni, out the router... | | nothing but net! | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | ** Come visit the Enterprise talker at enterprise.linex.com 5000 ** | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 18:08:26 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 16:07:39 -0700 Message-ID: <96050916073930@road.ci.portland.or.us> From: stana@road.ci.portland.or.us Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Subject: Renaming intranet address to an Internet address Is it possible to rename all refereneces to "mail.trans.city" (an intranet address) to "syseng.trans.ci.portland.or.us" (an Internet address) with the address_rewriter example program? I currently have a 10 node mixed architecture LAVCluster running MX 4.2. One of the nodes (PDOT6) has two NIC's installed, one for intranet access, the other for Internet access. In addition, I have a standalone VAX (BOM) also running MX 4.2. This machine also has two NIC's. The cluster is set up as an intranet domain named "trans.city". PDOT6 and BOM are set up for an Internet domain of "ci.portland.or.us". Incoming mail is currently received by PDOT6. Any address that is not "local" (not within the "trans.city" domain is routed to BOM which then sends it to the Internet. The problem I am having is that the return address is "username@host.trans.city" instead of "username@syseng.ci.portland.or.us"... I tried using the address_rewriter program, bu to no avail. Any hints suggestions would be greatly appreciated. _Stan A_ ! Stanton L. Archer, Sr. Systems Programmer (503) 823-7174 ! City of Portland, Office of Transportation, Systems Engineering ! Internet: stana@syseng.ci.portland.or.us ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 20:03:05 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 21:02:35 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A2173.4FE67520.7@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: Renaming intranet address to an Internet address >From: stana@road.ci.portland.or.us > > Is it possible to rename all refereneces to "mail.trans.city" (an intranet >address) to "syseng.trans.ci.portland.or.us" (an Internet address) with the >address_rewriter example program? > The problem I am having is that the return address is >"username@host.trans.city" instead of "username@syseng.ci.portland.or.us"... > I tried using the address_rewriter program, bu to no avail. > >Any hints suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Why not $ DEFINE/SYSTEM/EXEC MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST "@syseng.ci.portland.or.us" ? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 08:25:38 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 14:17:22 +0000 From: Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <009A2203.DEA3504A.3@dylan.softel.co.uk> Subject: address rewriter I am using an address rewriter based on the C example supplied with MX (MX V4.1 on VAX/VMS V5.5-2) It rewrites the From: header ok but does not touch the sender or reply to headers. As far as I can see the REWRITE_HEADER routine does not get called for these other headers. If so why is this and what can I do about it. I am using the address rewriter to ensure mail always appears to be from firstname.lastname@softel.co.uk irrepective of which node in our network and to change the username to an external name. *************************************************************************** Ian Miller "The time has come",the walrus said Teletext Dept.,Softel "to speak of many things". Tel: +44 1734 842151 from "Through the looking glass" Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk by Lewis Carrol. PSImail: 243273400398::IAN *************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 08:47:10 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 08:46:51 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A21D5.B24020EC.20@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: address rewriter Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk writes: > >I am using an address rewriter based on the C example supplied with MX >(MX V4.1 on VAX/VMS V5.5-2) > >It rewrites the From: header ok but does not touch the sender or reply to >headers. As far as I can see the REWRITE_HEADER routine does not get called >for these other headers. If so why is this and what can I do about it. > The routine gets called for those headers (should get called), but the C example doesn't do anything with them. You'll have to modify the C program (or the BLISS program) to rewrite those as well, if you want them rewritten. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 08:54:53 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 14:54:29 +0000 From: Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009A2209.0DE5736A.11@dylan.softel.co.uk> Subject: protection of mailing lists Is it possible to protect a mailing list so that non-subscribers can post to it but users whose address is not something@softel.co.uk can not. I have various mailing lists defined which are used to distribute information to say everyone in the company or everyone in a particular department. postings from non-subscribers are allowed so for example someone at one office can post a mail to everyone at another office. *************************************************************************** Ian Miller "The time has come",the walrus said Teletext Dept.,Softel "to speak of many things". Tel: +44 1734 842151 from "Through the looking glass" Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk by Lewis Carrol. PSImail: 243273400398::IAN *************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 09:26:23 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 09:26:13 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A21DB.322F810D.3@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: protection of mailing lists Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk writes: > >Is it possible to protect a mailing list so that non-subscribers can post to >it but users whose address is not something@softel.co.uk can not. > I haven't tried this, but this should work: set the list to not allow W:W and add an ACCESS entry for all users at one site (use the command "ADD/ACCESS <*@softel.co.uk>"). That should let all @SOFTEL.CO.UK users post, but not anyone outside of that domain. Single addresses can also be blocked in a non-W:W list by using the DENY setting, which was introduced in MX V4.2. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 10:48:35 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 16:47:20 +0000 From: Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A2218.D157A782.8@dylan.softel.co.uk> Subject: RE: address rewriter I added this lot to the swich statement in rewrite_header case MX_K_HDR_R_FROM: /* Resent From */ case MX_K_HDR_SENDER: /* Sender */ case MX_K_HDR_RETURN_PATH: /* return-Path */ case MX_K_HDR_REPLY_TO: /* Reply To */ case MX_K_HDR_R_SENDER: /* Resent Sender */ case MX_K_HDR_R_REPLY_TO: /* Resent Reply To */ and I added some debug stuff but rewrite_header only seems to get called with header code 1 (MX_K_HDR_FROM) and 3 (MX_K_HDR_TO) and not the others. I see in the MX V4.2 release notes some changes connected with the ADDRESS_REWRITER feature. Could this be what I need ? (most users here are using Eudora to post messages). *************************************************************************** Ian Miller "The time has come",the walrus said Teletext Dept.,Softel "to speak of many things". Tel: +44 1734 842151 from "Through the looking glass" Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk by Lewis Carrol. PSImail: 243273400398::IAN *************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 12:43:19 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 12:42:53 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A21F6.AB5FF105.63@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: address rewriter Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk writes: > >I added this lot to the swich statement in rewrite_header > [...] >and I added some debug stuff but rewrite_header only seems to get called >with header code 1 (MX_K_HDR_FROM) and 3 (MX_K_HDR_TO) and not the others. > >I see in the MX V4.2 release notes some changes connected with the >ADDRESS_REWRITER feature. Could this be what I need ? >(most users here are using Eudora to post messages). Well, the release notes say: o The MX Router was modified to perform site-specific header rewrites for all messages, regardless of origin. This was needed to allow site-specific aliases for messages coming from such sources as Eudora (using the ADDRESS_REWRITER feature). So, yes, you'll need V4.2 to effect the changes you want. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer, The LOKI Group, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 23:35:26 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 23:33:51 EDT From: Robert Byer Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009A2251.9BADE040.1@mail.all-net.net> Subject: Question: Mutiple Mail Domains With MX On Single Machine??? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Question... I have a VAX 6340 with 128MEG RAM running VMS 5.5-2HW, Wollongong Win TCP/IP v5.2 and MX v4.1 Is it possible for a single machine running MX to serve multiple mail domains? And if so, what exactly needs to be done to accomplish this. I would appreciate any and all help on this as I am new to this sort of thing. Robert Alan Byer, Vice-President A-Com Computing, Inc. 115 W. Washington St., Suite 1165 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317)673-4204 E-Mail: byer@carl.all-net.net Send An E-Mail Request For My PGP Key -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMZPR1qVSqzlBVJbBAQE2zAgAn2hDZN8iqO9m17ZyAZsgvtU2aWtVeDIz 3iq18WbM8UzXwW9PW0lLqqXmqY3cmF2drV7lb4262nSwGVKRUFFzIkAsqQM9WLd3 UYM8fp1LHyscMea08lA6txMzOHDRm/lN8OmBDVf0xiLkL5IVBMg4WFlNil5t04tg EzYQNKpF5YueKvmrJNk2+Cwag2cdx4hLAMCYo8wT48eiaTmPTpRCJ1fXdyOPV4uU W34OLVcIcdFKdo83pl7TahLhr53SozKQOrFGkVFizamE2ALlLu7PymNLn+qCnc4b gOWWdMgNBj/mudJGfwDJn5S18ewyL4l5CV0xhZce35szeQ6crOSDmw== =pC5a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 12:30:41 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 13:29:51 EDT From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: beeson@uamont.edu, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009A238F.901C24A0.2@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: Making a list moderated > I am trying to figure out how to make a currently un-moderated list > moderated. Here's how I do it, using the SITE interface. DEFINE REWRITE_RULE DEFINE REWRITE_RULE where: MailList is a mailing list that I run xxx is a secret password DEFINE PATH "yyy" SITE/ROUTE="MODERATED" DEFINE PATH "mod-in" SITE/ROUTE="MOD-IN" where: yyy is a secret password, which only the moderators know. They send mail to MailList%yyy@garnet.nist.gov. MX_DEVICE:[MX.EXE]SITE_DELIVER.COM looks like: $ SET NOON $ MX_ENTER := $MX_EXE:MX_SITE_IN $ $! Separate processing for different routes $ $ IF P1 .EQS. "FAX" THEN GOTO FAX_Start $ IF P1 .EQS. "MODERATED" THEN GOTO Moderated_Start $ IF P1 .EQS. "MOD-IN" THEN GOTO Mod_In_Start $ EXIT 4 $ $!------------------------------------------------------------------------- $ .... $ $!------------------------------------------------------------------------- $ $ Moderated_Start: $! $! Modify contents of source-file (P2) to remove Resent-To: header $! $ DEFINE/USER_MODE SYS$OUTPUT NL: $ EDIT/EDT/COMMAND=MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_MODERATED.DAT 'P2' $! $! Modify contents of dest-file (P3) to change from %yyy to -xxx $! $ DEFINE/USER_MODE SYS$OUTPUT NL: $ EDIT/EDT/COMMAND=MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P3_MODERATED.DAT 'P3' $ $ NEW_P2 = F$PARSE(";2",P2) $ NEW_P3 = F$PARSE(";2",P3) $! $! Send processed file on its way $! $ MX_ENTER 'NEW_P2' 'NEW_P3' "''P4'" $ $! Debugging information (Uncomment to see what's happening) $! $! $ open/write ofile mx_exe:showoff.txt $! $ write ofile p1 $! $ write ofile p2 $! $ write ofile p3 $! $ write ofile p4 $! $ write ofile new_p2 $! $ write ofile new_p3 $! $ close ofile $! $ copy 'p2' mx_exe:file2.txt $! $ copy 'p3' mx_exe:file3.txt $! $ copy 'new_p2' mx_exe:filen2.txt $! $ copy 'new_p3' mx_exe:filen3.txt $ $ DELETE 'NEW_P2' $ DELETE 'NEW_P3' $ $ EXIT 1 $ $!------------------------------------------------------------------------- $ $ Mod_In_Start: $ $ MX_ENTER 'P2' MX_SITE_DIR:MOD1.TXT "''P4'" $ MX_ENTER 'P2' MX_SITE_DIR:MOD2.TXT "''P4'" $ $! (MOD1 and MOD2 are files containing the addresses of the $! individual moderators.) $ $ EXIT 1 MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P3_MODERATED.DAT looks like: SUBSTITUTE/@yyy>/-xxx@GARNET.NIST.GOV>/ WHOLE /NOTYPE EXIT MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_MODERATED.DAT looks like: FIND "%yyy@" SUBSTITUTE/%yyy// /NOTYPE FIND "%yyy@" DELETE . EXIT This is very specific for the mail system that the moderator users. The first edit removes the secret word yyy from a Received From header. (Why a mailer puts the destination user@host in the Received From header is beyond me.) The second edit deletes the Resent-From header. (When the moderator accepts the message, forwarding it, a Resent-From header is added.) The moderator is not local, and does not use a VAX. If I understand some old notes, when moderating using VMS Mail, the appropriate files were: DELETE 2 THRU 12 EXIT if the FORWARD command was used, and EXIT if the FORWARD/NOHEADER command was used. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 12:35:05 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 13:34:29 EDT From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: stana@road.ci.portland.or.us, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009A2390.35803B20.5@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: Renaming intranet address to an Internet address > Is it possible to rename all refereneces to "mail.trans.city" (an intranet > address) to "syseng.trans.ci.portland.or.us" (an Internet address) with the > address_rewriter example program? What's wrong with REWRITE RULEs? Are you trying to recognize the address on incoming mail, or to readdress outgoing mail? - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 14:53:47 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 15:52:45 EDT From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: byer@mail.all-net.net, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009A23A3.8642B0C0.1@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: Question: Mutiple Mail Domains With MX On Single Machine??? > Is it possible for a single machine running MX to serve multiple mail > domains? And if so, what exactly needs to be done to accomplish this. It depends how isolated you need the mail domains to be. You can tell MX to recognize any number of host names as local to the VAX that runs it. However, it could not separate user@name1.com from user@name2.com, since MX would think that name1.com and name2.com are the same computer. Similarly, bounce messages from the Postmaster will not be synchronized with the host name on the To: address. Just so that we are on the same wavelength, the term "domain" actually applies to the Domain Name System. Mail (SMTP) doesn't know "domains," it only knows about individual hosts. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 17:59:56 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) Subject: Re: invalid final deliver userid: user@localhost ??? Date: 12 May 1996 22:53:20 GMT Message-ID: <4n5q50$j0l@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009A1F1B.E2220760.46@whscdp.whs.edu>, J Kmoch writes: =In the last few days, I as postmaster have been getting the following message. Er, it would've been nice if you'd told us from whom you've been getting the message. From postmaster@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us, perhaps? =>Invalid final delivery userid: USER@LOCALHOST => =>Original message follows. => =>Received: from [192.135.135.1] by mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us => (SMTPD32-960308) id A1BDBE40124; Mon May 06 17:48:29 1996 =>X-ListName: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu =>Warnings-To: <> =>Errors-To: owner-mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu =>Sender: owner-mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu =>Received: from mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us by WHSCDP.WHS.EDU (MX V4.1 VAX) with => SMTP; Mon, 06 May 1996 17:37:55 CST =>Received: from [169.227.130.9] by mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us (SMTPD32-960308) id => AE823501D6; Mon May 06 17:34:42 1996 =>X-Sender: WALLNEBJ@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us =>Message-ID: =>MIME-Version: 1.0 =>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" =>Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 17:39:10 -0600 =>To: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu =>From: jennesdr@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us =>Reply-To: mps-inservice@whscdp.whs.edu, jennesdr@MAIL.MILWAUKEE.K12.WI.US OK, going through the headers, it looks like jennesdr@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us sent mail to your list, via a mail gateway (mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us) for her organization. Your list processed it, and sent it to mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us (one would guess that jennesdr also subscribes to your list). It appears that mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us, in trying to process the address given in the RCPT TO: command of the SMTP protocoal, translated that to USER@LOCALHOST for some reason (a misconfiguration in sendmail there, perhaps?), and found it couldn't deliver it. =Anyone have any idea how this is happening and how to correct it? If you are, indeed, receiving that message from mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us, then you need to forward the bounced message to the postmaster there and have him or her deal with the problem. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 11:01:11 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 10:58:17 CST From: Patrick Beeson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: beeson@uamont.edu Message-ID: <009A25D5.E294E08F.376@uamont.edu> Subject: Resetting some parameters I run a listserver using MX and I have several entries in my que that are like: Entry: 1313, Origin: [Local] Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 511589 bytes Created: 19-APR-1996 21:44:21.58, expires 19-MAY-1996 21:44:21.58 Last modified 15-MAY-1996 08:03:11.19 SMTP entry #1312, status: READY, size: 1357 bytes, waiting for retry until 15-MAY-1996 08:34:12.08 Created: 19-APR-1996 21:44:32.73, expires 19-MAY-1996 21:44:21.58 Last modified 15-MAY-1996 08:04:12.11 Recipient #1: , Route=CDTI.ES DNS errors=1 Last error: %MX-F-NODNSRESPONSE, no response from DNS server I would like to set the expiration time to a value less than 30 days, but I can't locate anyway to do it. Is there way to do it? Is there any reason not to set it to a lower figure? Thanks for any insight you can give Patrick +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Patrick I. Beeson | Phone 501-460-1236| beeson@uamont.edu | |Assistant Director of CS | Fax 501-460-1922| ---------- | |Univ of Ark at Monticello | ----------- | ---------- | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Through the ethernet, off the demper, off the delni, out the router... | | nothing but net! | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | ** Come visit the Enterprise talker at enterprise.linex.com 5000 ** | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 12:19:55 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 13:18:35 EDT From: Brian Reed Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A25E9.7BF2E052.1@cbict3.cb.att.com> Subject: RE: Resetting some parameters >I would like to set the expiration time to a value less than 30 days, but >I can't locate anyway to do it. MCP>set smtp/MAXIMUM_RETRIES=24/RETRY_INTERVAL=30:00 retries times interval = duration But, in this case, it's a DNS failure, which is specified by: /DNS_RETRIES Brian D. Reed Columbus Works Brian.D.Reed@att.com 614-860-6218 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 13:51:02 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <01BB432E.A0907940@site04.dsi.uanl.mx> From: "David A. Hernandez Alonso" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-List@MadGoat.com'" Subject: Limiting the size of incoming mail. Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 13:50:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi everybody! I've got a Micro VAX 3100-80, running OpenVMS 6.2, UCX V3.3 and MX V4.2. I want to know how can I limit the size of the incoming mail to the users accounts. Actually, I give a quota of 5000 blocks in disk, but if a user receive a mail of 25,000 blocks, the user receive the mail ! !. This cause some problems of space on my disk. And of course the users override their quota and then they can't do anything. Including that they can't delete the big mail ! (the quota is override) Thanks in advance. :-) ________________________________________________________ U. A. N. L. Direccion de Informatica. Soporte Tecnico David A. Hernandez Alonso E- mail: dhernand@ccr.dsi.uanl.mx Tel.- [918]- 32940-81 Ext.- 5343 Fax.- [918]- 32940-83 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 14:28:12 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 14:28:06 CST From: hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A26BC.5D0724C2.5@uwwvax.uww.edu> Subject: RE: Limiting the size of incoming mail. => I've got a Micro VAX 3100-80, running OpenVMS 6.2, UCX V3.3 and => MX V4.2. => => I want to know how can I limit the size of the incoming mail to the users accounts. => => Actually, I give a quota of 5000 blocks in disk, but if a user receive a mail of => 25,000 blocks, the user receive the mail ! !. => This cause some problems of space on my disk. => => And of course the users override their quota and then they can't do anything. => Including that they can't delete the big mail ! (the quota is override) Fairly easy to do, remove the EXQUOTA priv. from startup. Have done this way for over 2 years. New versions of MX require the cahnages to be made again. Wish it were a install option. Lyle Hunter T & IR University Wisconsin-Whitewater hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 01:29:44 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 02:29:26 EST From: Jim Bender Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009A27EA.4C077C6A.1@bdsnet.com> Subject: Store and forward problem Hi! I've searched through the archives for an answer to this question, but I have not come across a definitive answer... We have MX 4.2 running on two nodes in our Vaxcluster... It works great for mail going to any of our local vax users. The problem comes from several nodes on our network that are not up 100% of the time, but need to recieve their mail via SMTP. We have set the DNS MX records for those nodes themselves to have the highest priority, and list our two MX vaxes with lower MX priorities. When those nodes are down, the vaxen start receiving their mail. The problem is that when MX retries the message 30 minutes later, it again sends it to one of the vaxen. This repeats until the message is bounced with a "received too many times by this host" error. How can we get MX to sit on these messages, and only bounce them if the target host doesn't come back up within a certain period of time? Thanks! Jim Bender jbender@bdsnet.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 21:16:35 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) Subject: Re: Limiting the size of incoming mail. Date: 19 May 1996 02:11:46 GMT Message-ID: <4nm012$3en@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <01BB432E.A0907940@site04.dsi.uanl.mx>, "David A. Hernandez Alonso" writes: =Hi everybody! = =I've got a Micro VAX 3100-80, running OpenVMS 6.2, UCX V3.3 and =MX V4.2. = =I want to know how can I limit the size of the incoming mail to the users accounts. = =Actually, I give a quota of 5000 blocks in disk, but if a user receive a mail =of 25,000 blocks, the user receive the mail ! !. =This cause some problems of space on my disk. First, make sure that none of your mail delivery agents (SYS$SYSTEM:MAIL.EXE, SYS$SYSTEM:MAIL_SERVER.EXE, and anything from a third party which delivers mail) are installed with EXQUOTA priv. =And of course the users override their quota and then they can't do anything. =Including that they can't delete the big mail ! (the quota is override) Now your last claim makes absolutely no sense whatever. Deleting a mail message does NOT require that you be under quota. Perhaps you're talking about some third-party product rather than VMS's MAIL utility? Or perhaps you're confusing a single large mail message with the growth of the user's MAIL.MAI file from having a large number of messages? If the latter, then yes, it is possible to end up with a mail file that the user can't compress, since compression requires that a new version of the file be created while the old one remains on disk. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 06:34:29 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) Subject: Re: Store and forward problem Date: 20 May 1996 06:34:59 GMT Message-ID: <4np3qj$f9v@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009A27EA.4C077C6A.1@bdsnet.com>, Jim Bender writes: =When those nodes are down, the vaxen start receiving their mail. The =problem is that when MX retries the message 30 minutes later, it =again sends it to one of the vaxen. This repeats until the message =is bounced with a "received too many times by this host" error. = =How can we get MX to sit on these messages, and only bounce them if =the target host doesn't come back up within a certain period of =time? One way to do it would be to: 1) Have a special set of names for those nodes that's for internal use only; 2) Do NOT associate any MX records with those special names. 3) Have MX use a rewrite rule to convert from the external name to the internal name. There's probably a better way to do it, but the above should work. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 10:39:04 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 16:37:54 +0000 From: Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009A2C4E.A776E820.6@dylan.softel.co.uk> Subject: long text lines in mail messages I have had complaints about text in mail messages being lost. It occurs in mail which contains long lines of text without record delimiters. I guess it is running into the 512 byte record limit that VMSMAIL has. In RFC822 it states that text lines of at least 1000 chars should be accepted. I guess Digital are not going to change VMSMAIL so can anything be done with MX to split these lines into several records ? *************************************************************************** Ian Miller "The time has come",the walrus said Teletext Dept.,Softel "to speak of many things". Tel: +44 1734 842151 from "Through the looking glass" Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk by Lewis Carrol. PSImail: 243273400398::IAN *************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 15:45:27 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 16:45:09 EDT From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009A2C4F.AB2F8DE0.13@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: long text lines in mail messages > I have had complaints about text in [incoming] mail messages being lost. Yeah, it's a real pain for me, too. > It occurs in mail which contains long lines of text without record > delimiters. I guess it is running into the 512 byte record limit that > VMSMAIL has. More likely, the 255-character variable-length string limit. > In RFC822 it states that text lines of at least 1000 chars should be > accepted. Check again -- there's no such requirement in RFC 822. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 17:24:13 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: dwing@tgv.com ("Dan Wing") Subject: RE: long text lines in mail messages Date: 23 May 1996 22:17:39 GMT Message-ID: <4o2o63$ddl@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009A2C4F.AB2F8DE0.13@garnet.nist.gov>, "Jonathan E. Hardis" writes: > > I have had complaints about text in [incoming] mail messages being lost. > > Yeah, it's a real pain for me, too. > > > It occurs in mail which contains long lines of text without record > > delimiters. I guess it is running into the 512 byte record limit that > > VMSMAIL has. > > More likely, the 255-character variable-length string limit. > > > In RFC822 it states that text lines of at least 1000 chars should be > > accepted. > > Check again -- there's no such requirement in RFC 822. RFC821 is where the line length is mentioned: 4.5.3. SIZES There are several objects that have required minimum maximum sizes. That is, every implementation must be able to receive objects of at least these sizes, but must not send objects larger than these sizes. **************************************************** * * * TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE, IMPLEMENTATION * * TECHNIQUES WHICH IMPOSE NO LIMITS ON THE LENGTH * * OF THESE OBJECTS SHOULD BE USED. * * * **************************************************** [...] text line The maximum total length of a text line including the is 1000 characters (but not counting the leading dot duplicated for transparency). [...] Errors due to exceeding these limits may be reported by using the reply codes, for example: 500 Line too long. 501 Path too long 552 Too many recipients. 552 Too much mail data. Due to the implementation of MX, it cannot determine if it'll do a local delivery, or if the message will be forwarded on -- so it really doesn't want to send a "500 Line too long" message if it exceeds 256 bytes (as it may just need to forward it to a system that can handle a long string). A more difficult-to-implement solution would be to bounce the message to the sender (or use the Warnings-To header) if it would be truncated in VMSmail. -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 03:41:21 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 09:35:56 GMT From: Howard Jeffrey Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu CC: c.glenister@vulcan.ccc.cranfield.ac.uk Message-ID: <009A2CDC.DF76D143.5@vulcan.ccc.cranfield.ac.uk> Subject: MX SMTP problems Dear all, I am having a few problems with MX at one of our sites. The systems is running VMS 6.2, UCX 3.3 and MX 4.1. The symptom is the system stops accepting smtp connections. The smtp server process is still running in a HIB state and looks ok. Upon shutdown the smtp server process just sits there in HIB state and ignores the request to stop. The other process are all ok as far as I can tell. local will still deliver locally ok. Any suggestions ? Thanks Howard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard Jeffrey. Computer Centre, Email: H.Jeffrey@cranfield.ac.uk Cranfield University, Tel: +44 (0)234 754207 Cranfield, Beds, MK43 OAL __o /\ England _ \<,_ / \/\ (_)/ (_) / \ \/\ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 08:27:23 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 09:26:43 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A2CDB.95862EE0.99@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: MX SMTP problems >From: Howard Jeffrey > > Dear all, > I am having a few problems with MX at one of our sites. > > The systems is running VMS 6.2, UCX 3.3 and MX 4.1. The symptom is the system > stops accepting smtp connections. The smtp server process is still running in a > HIB state and looks ok. Upon shutdown the smtp server process just sits there > in HIB state and ignores the request to stop. The other process are all ok as Interesting. My MX 4.2 Router process occasionally exhibits the same behavior, causing a big build-up in the queue. And the IUPOP3 server on another machine does the same thing. And both ignore shutdown requests. Unfortunately, I haven't discovered the cause or the cure for it. I hope you receive some helpful suggestions. > far as I can tell. local will still deliver locally ok. > > Any suggestions ? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 03:49:12 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) Subject: RE: long text lines in mail messages Date: 25 May 1996 08:34:15 GMT Message-ID: <4o6gm7$ns0@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009A2C4F.AB2F8DE0.13@garnet.nist.gov>, "Jonathan E. Hardis" writes: => I have had complaints about text in [incoming] mail messages being lost. = =Yeah, it's a real pain for me, too. = => It occurs in mail which contains long lines of text without record => delimiters. I guess it is running into the 512 byte record limit that => VMSMAIL has. = =More likely, the 255-character variable-length string limit. Er, just what limit is that? The string-length field in a string descriptor is DSC$W_LENGTH. The "W" stands for "word," as in 16 bits, not 8. => In RFC822 it states that text lines of at least 1000 chars should be => accepted. = =Check again -- there's no such requirement in RFC 822. In particular, RFC822 specifically states: A general "memo" framework is used. That is, a message con- sists of some information in a rigid format, followed by the main part of the message, with a format that is not specified in this document. The syntax of several fields of the rigidly-formated ("headers") section is defined in this specification; some of these fields must be included in all messages. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 May 1996 04:03:07 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 28 May 1996 11:03:09 +0200 From: Pierre Bru Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A300D.B7F50165.10@mailgate.spotimage.com> Subject: customized error messages is there a way, without modifying MX sources, to customize the error messages sent by MX on 'no such local user' exception ? regards, Pierre Bru System & Network Mrg. mailto:system@spotimage.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 May 1996 05:48:40 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 28 May 1996 10:54:44 +0000 From: Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <009A300C.8AFBBEE8.5@dylan.softel.co.uk> Subject: RE: long text lines in mail messages I got the RFC number wrong. The 1 000 char limit I mentioned is in RFC821. VMSMAIL appears to have a 255 byte record size when it is reading from the terminal. This can be seen if you keep typinh without pressing return. I have seen this with users who are used to wordprocessors who wrap text automatically. Locally I can attempt to educate users but what I was wondering about is mail arriving from the internet which has lines longer than 255 chars. These lines are truncated. I can see that it may be difficult for MX to respond with an error (and would the sending mailer handle it ). Parhaps MX could wrap lines to 255 chars. That is the MX Local Delivery agent would wrap to 255 chars. *************************************************************************** Ian Miller "The time has come",the walrus said Teletext Dept.,Softel "to speak of many things". Tel: +44 1734 842151 from "Through the looking glass" Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk by Lewis Carrol. PSImail: 243273400398::IAN *************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 08:19:33 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: neill@yrsk.demon.co.uk (Neill Clift) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: MX holding mail before send? Is it a good idea for costly links? Date: 29 May 96 13:35:57 +0000 Message-ID: <1996May29.133557.6738@yrsk.demon.co.uk> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Hello all, We have a resonable large (almost two hundred and growing) decnet network. We use MX to receive internet mail on just one machine in a cluster. Some months ago we started adding some nodes around europe and linked them with ISDN. The cisco routers at either end dial on demand etc to make DECnet links. The prices for these international data calls (you have to use 000 rather than 00 in the UK for a guaranteed 64kbit link) are very high and so we looked at ways of reducing the usage without affecting the users too much. We identified what we thought was an area of waste with users replying to mail for nodes on the other end of the ISDN links. Mail opens a channel at the start of the reply and keeps this open until the mail is finally sent. We encouraged and were very successful in getting the ISDN mail users to use MX rather than direct decnet access as MX does not open the link until mail delivery time. This cut down the total number of calls actually made. We have now come to the conclusion that there are a large number of discussions occurring in mail between developers and users that could probably benefit by having the mail messages delayed by a short period of times (a few minutes) in order that MX could deliver a number of messages at one go. I am willing to do the work to get this working if people on this group (MX users) think it might be generally useful. What are your thoughts on the idea? MX currently seems to treat every single queue entry as a separate item rather than grouping messages going to the same place. We would probably need to start all mails going to a particular node at the same time after some holding period. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks. Neill. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 13:22:29 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 13:22:04 EDT From: Robert Byer Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009A30EA.4A91F140.7@mail.all-net.net> Subject: Problems With MIME Mail With MX v4.1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I've been getting reports from our users that when they send or recieve mime encoded e-mail messages, MX is doing "something" to them that is making them unreadable. I've isolated that it is not something with the individual users' e-mail programs. Any suggestions where to start looking? I'm running on a VAX 6340, 128MEG RAM, VMS 5.5-2HW, Wollongong's WinTCP v5.2. I would try to run the new MX v4.2 to see if it is a problem with MX, but every time I try it appears that the new MX dosen't like my TCP/IP package and won't spool any SMTP mail locally. I would appreciate ANY and all help with this problem. Robert Alan Byer, Vice-President A-Com Computing, Inc. 115 W. Washington St., Suite 1165 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317)673-4204 E-Mail: byer@carl.all-net.net WEB: http://www.all-net.net/~byer Send An E-Mail Request For My PGP Key -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMaxO9KVSqzlBVJbBAQEthQgAwAGu5lOmXZpPjzSbyJAnzMcBlmjXj41Q zKBS/wUah+fdz2DsHKQW46kYSAP3d+uglF3v+OpDrFSD9ivyifHvj5UHEEgErSJn ESBxP4gdfklaNUBsnBwJOtNRc336Z0qAhQgkBOld9/mL/LRgkSm0jxwzc40gMp1A oHraMjw3NnIG75vSV5K7QdH8YiA4eJDpJw4AttSfZxXyXbn8frtwSsof9STFrF48 qa4cc3O+KRjFSudJOoPxaLKSZAz5M5tMMjNWVG612oxFUNyGXrNHn6y1LGKlmIpA F2VaYKpUhBSMQSk/6LMnKuLKelCIwqgIPlEyrmMLDkCuu5+d6lUo/g== =xbXv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 16:00:06 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 16:58:55 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A3108.95795FE0.43@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: MX holding mail before send? Is it a good idea for costly links? >From: neill@yrsk.demon.co.uk (Neill Clift) Hello all, ...... >We have now come to the conclusion that there are a large number of discussions >occurring in mail between developers and users that could probably benefit by >having the mail messages delayed by a short period of times (a few minutes) in >order that MX could deliver a number of messages at one go. >I am willing to do the work to get this working if people on this group (MX >users) think it might be generally useful. What are your thoughts on the idea? >MX currently seems to treat every single queue entry as a separate item rather >than grouping messages going to the same place. We would probably need to start >all mails going to a particular node at the same time after some holding >period. >Let me know your thoughts. >Thanks. > Neill. We have a T1 connection to the outside world, and so the cost remains constant regardless of when messages are sent. There would be no benefit to us to having mail message delayed by a short period of time. Instead of putting delays into the MX queues, would it be possible instead to delay access to the routers which do the dialing? Make the routers available at scheduled intervals? Or permit or require them to dial only at scheduled times or intervals? This might permit the desired accumulation of messages to a particular node. We don't use dial-ups so I haven't tried this sort of idea, so I don't know whether it would be easier to change MX or the routers. But MX is working so well now, that I would be reluctant to throw away any of the cards in a winning hand. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 16:12:47 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 17:11:28 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A310A.56CAB440.124@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: Problems With MIME Mail With MX v4.1 >From: Robert Byer >I've been getting reports from our users that when they send or recieve >mime encoded e-mail messages, MX is doing "something" to them that is >making them unreadable. I've isolated that it is not something with the >individual users' e-mail programs. > >Any suggestions where to start looking? I'm running on a VAX 6340, 128MEG >RAM, VMS 5.5-2HW, Wollongong's WinTCP v5.2. I would try to run the new >MX v4.2 to see if it is a problem with MX, but every time I try it appears >that the new MX dosen't like my TCP/IP package and won't spool any SMTP >mail locally. > >I would appreciate ANY and all help with this problem. Are you sure that it is MX that is causing the problem? We are running MX 4.2 on a variety of computers running VMS 5.5-2, VMS 6.0, and VMS 6.2, and IUPOP3. Our TCP/IP transport is UCX 3.1 and 4.0. The e-mail client that we use is Eudora Pro v 2.2. Our users are sending and receiving pictures (*.bmp,*.gif), spreadsheets (*.xls), "movies", etc., with no reports that anything has become unreadable. I have sent and received such files myself with no problem. MX delivers mail to your users VMS mail box. What takes it out of the VMS mail box and delivers it to your users' e-mail programs? Perhaps you should look there. If it is a POP3 server, is it configured correctly? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 17:46:40 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 17:46:24 EDT From: Robert Byer Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009A310F.38228D60.7@mail.all-net.net> Subject: RE: Problems With MIME Mail With MX v4.1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >Are you sure that it is MX that is causing the problem? We are running >MX 4.2 on a variety of computers running VMS 5.5-2, VMS 6.0, and VMS 6.2, >and IUPOP3. Our TCP/IP transport is UCX 3.1 and 4.0. > I'm fairly certain that it is at the server end. We use Eudora Light and Eudora Pro along with other packages and all the settings are correct. > >The e-mail client that we use is Eudora Pro v 2.2. Our >users are sending and receiving pictures (*.bmp,*.gif), spreadsheets (*.xls), >"movies", etc., with no reports that anything has become unreadable. I >have sent and received such files myself with no problem. MX delivers >mail to your users VMS mail box. What takes it out of the VMS mail box >and delivers it to your users' e-mail programs? Perhaps you should >look there. If it is a POP3 server, is it configured correctly? > We are using IU's POP3 server and as far as I can tell, everything is configured correctly and it is running just great. If it is the POP3 server, where should I start looking? We tested out our clients e-mail package with another provider and using a different server, everything works great. If I use ours, the users get the message, but instead of decoding the message, it just displays it in it's encoded form. Robert Alan Byer, Vice-President A-Com Computing, Inc. 115 W. Washington St., Suite 1165 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317)673-4204 E-Mail: byer@carl.all-net.net WEB: http://www.all-net.net/~byer Send An E-Mail Request For My PGP Key -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMayM6KVSqzlBVJbBAQGIqAgAkuPn+cG6+kzpo5VaZ/CEpQpZ86wHzpcZ gqjaRdqp91ZtRkp+mI206WUfPdJtK66rM91QMPpSH01cglfQSz62YqDC6CufBtzT 0H15xKh0yucymrZ6qODMU0z6K01glx+N9nXK/V503yTgmBfsg0IRsNhcz1v+fQmJ aKgImW0J1yUuh70vBaOADOUxFf+fz1/jwbuG1rUhLFsXEdh3LImmh5k9OI4wXdty oXdqhxtdoTAH5SEWKU6v6xmHNQdKKHkAQQObYGqOYUeVpV4pNYCTUb5nS/fh9gxZ RuZzqYS9p37QOp9+NwmKTehYXhCGXvLUfjPt7UVcQT7Lzu6f0vo7uA== =AdiH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 19:18:39 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 20:17:45 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A3124.5C707AA0.31@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: Problems With MIME Mail With MX v4.1 From: Robert Byer >I'm fairly certain that it is at the server end. We use Eudora Light and >Eudora Pro along with other packages and all the settings are correct. > >We are using IU's POP3 server and as far as I can tell, everything is >configured correctly and it is running just great. If it is the POP3 >server, where should I start looking? Sounds as though you did not use the IGNORE_MAIL11_HEADERS option when you ran the MAKE procedure. From the IUPOP3 README.TXT (note last sentence): IGNORE_MAIL11_HEADERS This option controls whether or not IUPOP3 will completely ignore the VMS Mail headers (From:, To:, etc.) for non-DECnet mail messages. This is something you'll want to do if all of your non-DECnet mail has valid SMTP mail headers beginning on line 1 of the mail message, or if you have users receiving MIME mail from the Internet. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 02:22:02 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 09:19:15 +0200 From: Leyrat@criuc.unicaen.fr Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: Leyrat@criuc.unicaen.fr Message-ID: <009A3191.890AE63C.96@clenche.msh.unicaen.fr> Subject: RE: Problems With MIME Mail With MX v4.1 > > > >We are using IU's POP3 server and as far as I can tell, everything is > >configured correctly and it is running just great. If it is the POP3 > >server, where should I start looking? > I had such a problem, which i solved applying the (following) modifications posted in iupop3-users list by Mr. Zielonko. Hope that it helps. J. Leyrat ******************************************************************** From: MX%"zielonko@ucx.lkg.dec.com" 7-MAY-1996 19:29:54.37 To: MX%"iupop3-users@indiana.edu" CC: Subj: Re: IUPOP3 bug fix Hello, Firstly. Thanks to you Mr. Westerman for going to the trouble to find this bug. I just took a look at the recommended changes and there seems to be a problem with them. Since the variable is declared globally all 31 threads can access and therefore change it. This flag needs to be maintained separately for each thread. The correct place for such a flag is in the POP struct. Here are the changes I made: In iupop3_general.h change this: int user_valid; /* User in SYSUAF & flags good*/ to this: int user_valid; /* User in SYSUAF & flags good*/ int first; (ie. add the line with first in it.) In iupop3_vms.c change this (according to the results of DIFF) : ************ File WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;2 593 p->first = TRUE; 594 if (mail_retrieve_message_text(p, decnet)) ****** File WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;1 593 if (mail_retrieve_message_text(p, decnet)) ************ ************ File WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;2 785 #ifdef MULTINET ****** File WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;1 784 #ifdef IGNORE_MAIL11_HEADERS 785 int first = TRUE; 786 #endif IGNORE_MAIL11_HEADERS 787 #ifdef MULTINET ************ ************ File WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;2 840 if (p->first) 841 { /* skip first line of message (should be blank) */ 842 p->first = FALSE; 843 p->retrieve.lines_sent++; /* make sure line is counted as sent */ ****** File WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;1 842 if (first) 843 { /* skip first line of message (should be blank) */ 844 first = FALSE; 845 p->retrieve.lines_sent++; /* make sure line is counted as sent */ ************ Number of difference sections found: 3 Number of difference records found: 7 DIFFERENCES /IGNORE=()/MERGED=1/OUTPUT=WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]A.A;1- WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;2- WORK10$:[ZIELONKO.BUILD.SRC.POP]IUPOP3_VMS.C;1 *********************************************************************** Jacques LEYRAT ! Tel: (33-)31-46-62-12 Centre de Ressources Informatiques (C.R.I.U.C) ! Universite de Caen ! Fax: (33-)31-44-58-54 14032 Caen Cedex ! FRANCE !e-mail: Leyrat@criuc.unicaen.fr *********************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 03:51:23 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 10:50:50 +0200 From: "Rok Vidmar, NUK Ljubljana" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009A319E.54A45290.3@nuk.uni-lj.si> Subject: RE: MX holding mail before send? Is it a good idea for costly links? > >We have now come to the conclusion that there are a large number of discussions > >occurring in mail between developers and users that could probably benefit by > >having the mail messages delayed by a short period of times (a few minutes) in > >order that MX could deliver a number of messages at one go. > > >I am willing to do the work to get this working if people on this group (MX > >users) think it might be generally useful. What are your thoughts on the idea? > >MX currently seems to treat every single queue entry as a separate item rather > >than grouping messages going to the same place. We would probably need to start > >all mails going to a particular node at the same time after some holding > >period. > > >Let me know your thoughts. > >Thanks. > > Neill. > > We have a T1 connection to the outside world, and so the cost remains constant > regardless of when messages are sent. There would be no benefit to us to > having mail message delayed by a short period of time. > Instead of putting delays into the MX queues, would it be possible instead to > delay access to the routers which do the dialing? Make the routers available > at scheduled intervals? Or permit or require them to dial only at scheduled > times or intervals? This might permit the desired accumulation of messages > to a particular node. We don't use dial-ups so I haven't tried this sort of > idea, so I don't know whether it would be easier to change MX or the routers. > But MX is working so well now, that I would be reluctant to throw away any > of the cards in a winning hand. Scott, Neill has my aye. Even with your idea you have to group messages going to the same place to fire them off when the path gets available. We too do not need this functionality, but I beleive much more places will have e_mail with it, so I think it's worth the effort. Regards, Rok Vidmar Internet: rok.vidmar@uni-lj.si National and University Library Phone: +386 61 125 4218 Turjaska 1, 1000 Ljubljana Fax: +386 61 125 5007 Slovenia ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 04:26:22 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19960530092131.3f6ffa1a@gateway.actfs.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 10:21:31 +0100 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Problems With MIME Mail With MX v4.1 We run MX4.1 under VAX VMS 6.2 with Eudora Light 1.5.4(16) and IUPOP3. Everything is working fine. John Rourke ================================================================ At 17:46 29/05/96 EDT, you wrote: > >> >>Are you sure that it is MX that is causing the problem? We are running >>MX 4.2 on a variety of computers running VMS 5.5-2, VMS 6.0, and VMS 6.2, >>and IUPOP3. Our TCP/IP transport is UCX 3.1 and 4.0. >> > >I'm fairly certain that it is at the server end. We use Eudora Light and >Eudora Pro along with other packages and all the settings are correct. > >> >>The e-mail client that we use is Eudora Pro v 2.2. Our >>users are sending and receiving pictures (*.bmp,*.gif), spreadsheets (*.xls), >>"movies", etc., with no reports that anything has become unreadable. I >>have sent and received such files myself with no problem. MX delivers >>mail to your users VMS mail box. What takes it out of the VMS mail box >>and delivers it to your users' e-mail programs? Perhaps you should >>look there. If it is a POP3 server, is it configured correctly? >> > >We are using IU's POP3 server and as far as I can tell, everything is >configured correctly and it is running just great. If it is the POP3 >server, where should I start looking? > >We tested out our clients e-mail package with another provider and using >a different server, everything works great. If I use ours, the users >get the message, but instead of decoding the message, it just displays >it in it's encoded form. > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 07:21:50 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 08:21:35 EDT From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009A3189.7B320FC0.4@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: MX holding mail before send? Is it a good idea for costly links? >> We have now come to the conclusion that there are a large number of >> discussions occurring in mail between developers and users that could >> probably benefit by having the mail messages delayed by a short period of >> times (a few minutes) in order that MX could deliver a number of messages >> at one go. > Instead of putting delays into the MX queues, would it be possible > instead to delay access to the routers which do the dialing? Make the > routers available at scheduled intervals? And how would you propose synchronizing the routers to the MX retry schedule? The solution to this problem is relatively simple, provided you have access to the MX source code and are willing to recompile it (which seems to be the premise here). Change the SMTP process to go to sleep for the desired amount of time whenever no items are found in the queue for it to process. That code must be in there already, with a relatively short sleep time. (Also, have no more than one SMTP process active at a time.) In the unlikely event that you really want separate delays for different destinations, you could clone SMTP into, say, SMTPA, SMTPB, SMTPC, etc., all different delivery processes that are initiated the same way SMTP is. Each would have its own special sleep time. Then, you would configure: DEFINE PATH dest1.co.uk SMTPA DEFINE PATH dest2.co.uk SMTPB DEFINE PATH dest3.co.uk SMTPC The downside to this method is that SMTP would be asleep and also unable to process commands such as RESET, SHUTDOWN, STATUS, etc. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 08:03:37 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: dwing@tgv.com ("Dan Wing") Subject: Re: MX holding mail before send? Is it a good idea for costly links? Date: 29 May 1996 23:43:35 GMT Message-ID: <4oinf7$4ra@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1996May29.133557.6738@yrsk.demon.co.uk>, you write: [...] > I am willing to do the work to get this working if people on this group (MX > users) think it might be generally useful. What are your thoughts on the idea? > MX currently seems to treat every single queue entry as a separate item rather > than grouping messages going to the same place. We would probably need to start > all mails going to a particular node at the same time after some holding > period. This could be helpful for sites that have temporary connections to their ISPs, but don't want to use UUCP (it seems many ISPs don't know how to setup UUCP anymore). Depending on how it is implemented, it could help with sites that have largish MX mailing lists with mail to several users at the same host (user@host) by sending one message with multiple RCPT TO lines, which I don't believe MLF does today. What Matt implemented here for MX is a relatively simple lock mechanism, so that whenever we try to send mail to a site, and it fails, a file is created. This file prevents subsequent attempts to communicate with that host (by any other threads) until that file is older than the SMTP retry interval (when the file is deleted). A similar technique could be used, except you would just disable the code that deletes the file if it is older than the SMTP retry interval. You could create the lock file when you don't want send mail -- then delete it when you want to send mail and somehow release all the MX jobs for the host you want to communicate with, and then re-create the file.... -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 08:03:45 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: dwing@tgv.com ("Dan Wing") Subject: Re: Problems With MIME Mail With MX v4.1 Date: 30 May 1996 02:19:14 GMT Message-ID: <4oj0j2$cna@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009A30EA.4A91F140.7@mail.all-net.net>, Robert Byer writes: > I've been getting reports from our users that when they send or recieve > mime encoded e-mail messages, MX is doing "something" to them that is > making them unreadable. I've isolated that it is not something with the > individual users' e-mail programs. > > Any suggestions where to start looking? I'm running on a VAX 6340, 128MEG > RAM, VMS 5.5-2HW, Wollongong's WinTCP v5.2. I would try to run the new > MX v4.2 to see if it is a problem with MX, but every time I try it appears > that the new MX dosen't like my TCP/IP package and won't spool any SMTP > mail locally. > > I would appreciate ANY and all help with this problem. If you have MX putting headers at the bottom of messages, that could be causing the problem. I can't think of anything else MX would do to MIME messages. -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 10:41:03 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: "MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU" Subject: Is any way to automatically reply email with MX Date: Fri, 31 May 96 11:38:06 -0500 From: Junyao Xu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Hi, there, Since vacation session is coming, some users hope to let the system automatically replay incoming message (like answer machine). Is there any way to do so with MX ? Can we set a regular user account like a list server? Thanks, Junyao North Carolina State University ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 12:09:44 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 19:09:44 +0200 From: Pierre Bru Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A32AD.30BB0A85.1@mailgate.spotimage.com> Subject: RE: Is any way to automatically reply email with MX this seems to be a good job for DELIVER. >Since vacation session is coming, some users hope to let the system >automatically replay incoming message (like answer machine). Is there any >way to do so with MX ? Can we set a regular user account like a list >server? Pierre Bru System & Network Mgr. mailto:system@spotimage.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 12:21:54 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 13:20:33 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009A327C.6915A240.87@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: Is any way to automatically reply email with MX >From: Junyao Xu >Hi, there, > >Since vacation session is coming, some users hope to let the system >automatically replay incoming message (like answer machine). Is there any >way to do so with MX ? Can we set a regular user account like a list >server? MX will not do this, but there is a package called DELIVER that will. It is available via anonymous ftp from ftp.spc.edu in the directory [ANONYMOUS.MACRO32.SAVESETS], and is probably available from other sites as well. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services FAX: 508-697-1774 Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 12:48:36 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 13:37:13 EDT From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: jxu@cptvs4.cvm.ncsu.edu Message-ID: <009A327E.BD619C80.6@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Is any way to automatically reply email with MX Junyao Xu (jxu@cptvs4.cvm.ncsu.edu) writes: >Since vacation session is coming, some users hope to let the system >automatically replay incoming message (like answer machine). Is there any >way to do so with MX ? Can we set a regular user account like a list >server? Seems to me I've seen an example on how to use the SITE interface to do this posted to the MX-List. Check the archives at ftp.wku.edu:[.lists.mx-list]. One caution: make sure that you filter out automatic replies to lists such as this one or all of the subscribers will see the responses, since they'll be posted in the list. You could conceivably get a loop going where someone posts to the list, which sends you the message, to which your automailer responses, which posts to the list, which sends the message to you, to which your automailer responds,... -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman_brian@si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | tillman@swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+--------------------------------